The absence of ideology in modern politics has become one of the most overlooked forces shaping global instability and conflict, a pattern that echoes throughout history in the recurring economic, religious, political, and social divisions that so often culminate in violence rather than resolution. Despite the tragic way in which history repeats itself, we continue to witness the same mistakes, the same latent behaviors, the same actions that can potentially lead to destruction. Ideas, behaviors, thoughts, and beliefs about how the world should and must function, essentially, a desire for social change through regulatory processes, bring with them rapid normative shifts and profound changes in how ordinary people think about and perceive the world around them. Rhetoric that frames a virtuous and wronged “us” against a hostile and evil “them” remains one of the most fundamental formulas behind such transformations.
Ideologies are systems of ideas and beliefs that shape how people understand power, society, and the role of the state. They tend to involve abstract concepts that are applied to the real world and, for this reason, they are most commonly encountered in the realm of politics. Ideologies are neither inherently right nor wrong; rather, they are more or less effective in advancing the interests of a particular group. Their primary social function is often considered to be the coordination of social practices among group members, allowing for the effective pursuit of collective goals and the protection of shared interests. And while ideologies may present a wide range of perspectives, we repeatedly observe them being pushed to their extremes.
It has now been 81 years since the end of World War II, the greatest and most tragic proof that such ideologies can bring not only total destruction, but also the closest image of hell humanity has ever created. The Cold War, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the genocide in Gaza, political campaigns and rhetoric, all of these are rooted in ideological foundations: frameworks or filters through which reality is presented in radically different ways. Often, these foundations are not immediately visible, and when we attempt to analyze political discourse, we are compelled to search for motives rather than truth.
We therefore observe a framework through which reality becomes distorted, so much so that it is often difficult to understand how one arrives at such cognitive conclusions. Nevertheless, and despite the historical knowledge available to us, it is crucial to understand that ideologies emerge, in part, from individual differences in perception, belief, and action, based on how the world ought to be. In essence, an ideology becomes problematic when it ceases to be a tool for understanding the world and instead transforms into a mechanism of imposition, exclusion, and blind adherence.
An interesting question, then, is whether we are currently witnessing such ideologies during a period of instability and historical regression.
Overall, the answer is yes, and it almost always has been. Ideological political will has existed even among the most indifferent or careless political representatives. It framed and anchored their positions. In short, it made them predictable. However inhumane or unethical their actions may have been, they were largely consistent with the personality and worldview of the individual in power. At the very least, they always served a purpose, whether religious, economic, or geopolitical.
However, we now live in an era of radical disruption to the status quo. We are witnessing, by the standards of our democratic values, a fundamentally new way in which politics is being practiced. A significant portion of the responsibility for this shift lies with U.S. President Donald Trump, whose rise acted as the final shock in an already unstable geopolitical period. We observe behavior of questionable grounding and rhetoric of uncertain origin, behavior so reversible and erratic that the only constant is instability itself. We hear ideas emerge from his mouth that are genuinely unhinged, yet devoid of any ideological foundation.
This is precisely where the absurdity lies.
The absence of any ideological, ethical, religious, or political framework renders such behavior dangerous and terrifying. The only observable foundation is personal gain; it is the desire for power, the gratification of constant exposure, and the pleasure of being the center of global attention. These are his primary motivations. What we are witnessing is the politics of a child, behavior more befitting a television host than the president of a global superpower. And since this has been mentioned, there is a very interesting statistic on this claim. Since the beginning of the US president’s second term, his total assets amount to approximately 1,408,500,000$, of which these are Trump’s documented earnings, i.e., 16,822 times more than a middle-class home in America. It is estimated that he made a few hundred million dollars extra from his crypto businesses.
It is, at the very least, tragicomic to watch such a reality unfold before our eyes.
We are therefore living in an era where the absence of ideology is being enacted in a manner that is absurd, ridiculous, and profoundly dangerous. We observe a single individual driving an entire nation toward destruction, guided solely by personal profit. Two individuals are already dead following ICE raids, thousands have been displaced from their homes, and a series of catastrophic geopolitical decisions have completely reshaped the world as we once knew it. From unstable and disappointingly limited aid to Ukraine, to contradictory tariffs, overt friendliness toward Putin, unwavering support for Israel, the recognition of Jerusalem as part of Israel, effectively denying the Palestinian people any right to voice, let alone participate in the discussion, the willful disregard of an ongoing genocide, and the farcical “peace committees” designed to consolidate power even after the end of his term. The list could continue for paragraphs.
None of this occurs because the American president represents ideas, nor because he holds a coherent vision of how the world should function, but rather for personal enrichment, for the purposes of enriching himself, as if what he already possesses were not enough.
The image presented is that of a conservative, a figure of the right. Yet reality repeatedly demonstrates that it was precisely this community that granted him fame, wealth, power, and the freedom to operate without filters, ethics, or reality checks. In turn, he embraced this role and pushed it to its absolute extreme.
How absurd?
We live in a period of rapid change, instability, and crisis, not for the usual reasons, but because unchecked power has been granted to a president who seeks adoration and dominion rather than responsibility.
